Mitchell R Davidson just can’t seem to get a break. With suspicions of federal felonious collusion swirling around his untimely hiring by Purdy Enterprise, from Market Ready, one would have thought that his exceptionally toxic and hard line tactics might take a backseat. Yeah, right. Purdy Enterprise, recently awarded nearly One Hundred Million dollars in US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Contracts, had those Contracts written while Davidson was still working at Market Ready — the very same Market Ready whom refused to prove their innocence after an Official Size Protest from a competitor. What would you expect, though, from Thomas and Lila Purdy after they brought on Davidson?
Look, I know what you are thinking right now. If things are changing, how is it that Mitch Davidson could so blatantly get away with what appears to be collusion upon HUD Contracts? To be candid, Davidson is a post primacy NAMFS stooge. And Davidson’s pals, over at Innotion Enterprise, are in for a rude awakening, as well. We are beginning to hear that even as Purdy Enterprise expanded its operations into Illinois, the same state Innotion Enterprise received HUD Awards, their Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama Awards are being hotly contested. Moreover, though, Davidson and his family, have been branded for life. Google has a very long and hard memory when it comes to the shit people do. And when the rubber hits the road, I believe we are ultimately going to see some pretty dramatic shakeups at HUD. Oh, not by the HUD Office of the Inspector General (OIG) or their Special Investigations Unit (SIU). Those folks are so ignorant you can’t even pay them off; HUD OIG simply does not even have a clue about the Management and Marketing (M&M) Contract. No, I wager that by now both the US Department of Labor (DoL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) and those damn pesky US Department of Justice (DoJ) Hoover boys are consulting with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to see how best to divvy up the pie.
The questions which begin to present are precisely how far Davidson and Purdy will go to violate the constitutionally guaranteed civil rights of Minority Females and Labor. I used to believe that this was simply boilerplate language which Davidson authorized. A recent reading of the Purdy Enterprise Contract, though, rapidly dispelled that. They have a Disparagement Clause which should strike fear into anyone whom has ever felt the wrath of White America. Moreover, though, if you are female, you had better commit yourself to being raped and keeping your mouth shut lest Purdy Enterprise sue you. And if you believe that it ends when you leave their involuntary servitude, guess again as it is effective FOREVER!
Subcontractor agrees and commits to not disparage, denigrate, defame, discredit, dishonor, injure, or otherwise communicate negatively about PE, directly or indirectly, while this Agreement is active and thereafter. This clause applies to both oral and written communications, including social media and other online type postings. […] The only exception for this section shall be if Subcontractor makes truthful statements about PE when compelled by court order, legal proceeding, or otherwise required by law. — Purdy Enterprise Disparagement Clause
Let that sink in for a moment. If you ever go to law enforcement, for any reason whatsoever, Purdy Enterprise will sue you if they do not like the reason — there is that Disparagement Clause. Well, I don’t work for Mitch Davidson or Thomas Purdy. Fuck them and the white, cotton ponies they are riding around on. In all the years of covering the Mortgage Field Services Industry, I have never ran across people whom are more deserving of being in prison than they and their families. How dare Mitch Davidson attempt to silence whistleblowers? I mean does Davidson really believe he can thumb his nose at the federal government? Strike that. The answer is yes. The real question is whether or not Kimberlee Satterfield, formerly the HUD Small Business Specialist for the Southeast, Southwest and Caribbean territories, and now the Acting Southern Field Contracting Operations Director in Atlanta. We are hoping that as a Chicago native, she will be up to the task of confronting discrimination, head on, as one of the first major duties in her new posting. Satterfield replaced Craig Karnes, whom is now the Assistant Chief Procurement Officer for Field Operations.
Here is what the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) require,
In summary, the new FAR 52.203-19 bars contractors from requiring their employees or subcontractors to sign or comply with “internal confidentiality agreements or statements” that would prohibit them from reporting “waste, fraud, or abuse” on a federal contract. FAR 52.203-19(b). Contractors who disregard this rule are prohibited from receiving federal funds. FAR 3.909-1(a).
So, I am hopeful that HUD — specifically Craig Karnes as this Award was on his watch — can explain to the American Public why it is that Purdy Enterprise is getting a pass when it comes to False Claims Acts with respect to the FAR. I mean let’s all stop bullshitting around. Maybe it’s time everyone open up the bank accounts to the HUD Office of the Inspector General (OIG). The HUD M&M FSM 3.10 has been nothing but corruption. Jesus, they cannot even issue the Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi Contracts as HUD never did true due diligence upon Innotion Enterprise. And I doubt anyone will see that Award until the end of September.
Here is what the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had to say when they fined a similar company,
SEC rules prohibit employers from taking measures through confidentiality, employment, severance, or other type of agreements that may silence potential whistleblowers before they can reach out to the SEC. We will vigorously enforce this provision.
Foreclosurepedia, always a Friend of Labor, felt compelled to send a letter to HUD, DoL, and the SEC earlier today.
Here Is The Email We Sent To Both HUD and DoL Earlier Today
Purdy Enterprise, a US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Management and Marketing (M&M) Field Service Manager (FSM) 3.10 Awardee in 2 Regions and 4 States, recently released a “FSM 3.10 SUBCONTRACTOR AGREEMENT” which it requires all Subcontractors to execute in order to work upon the aforesaid HUD Award. On behalf of Minority Females and Labor whom are Members of both the National Association of Mortgage Field Services (NAMFS) and the International Association of Field Service Technicians (IAFST), Foreclosurepedia is formally lodging this Complaint.
The two points I am gravely concerned with appear to run afoul of FAR Case 2015-012 which implemented section 743 of Division E, Title VII, of the 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, Pub. L. No. 113-235. Section 743(a). It provides, in pertinent part, that:
None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this or any other Act may be available for a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement with an entity that requires employees or contractors of such entity seeking to report fraud, waste, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or contractors from lawfully reporting such waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information.
Section 743(b) goes further; however, and provides that “[t]he limitation in subsection (a) shall not contravene requirements applicable to [various forms] issued by a Federal department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.” As part of implementing Section 743’s requirements, it required any offeror to represent compliance with the statutory prohibition:
[The offeror shall] represent that it does not require employees or subcontractors of such entity seeking to report waste, fraud, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or subcontractors from lawfully reporting such waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information.
The PE Contract states in Section XV NON-DISPARAGEMENT, Subcontractor agrees and commits to not disparage, denigrate, defame, discredit, dishonor, injure, or otherwise communicate negatively about PE, directly or indirectly, while this Agreement is active and thereafter. This clause applies to both oral and written communications, including social media and other online type postings. PE will be entitled to damages and reasonable attorney fees in the event that Subcontractor violates the requirements of this section. The only exception for this section shall be if Subcontractor makes truthful statements about PE when compelled by court order, legal proceeding, or otherwise required by law.
So, as HUD has been able to investigate a plethora of civil and criminal issues based upon Minority Females and Labor coming forward, I am curious how Subcontractors would be able to come forward? Moreover, though, the PE Contract would violate The Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016 (the “Act”) prohibits companies from including provisions in their form agreements that ban or impose penalties on consumers who post negative comments or reviews. The Act also restricts companies from requiring individuals to assign ownership of the intellectual property rights in such negative comments or reviews.
Section XVI NON-COMPETITION AND NON-SOLICITATION is even more onerous. First, it presupposes that Subcontractors have NO relationship with HUD. Second, it prevents ALL Subcontractors from ever bidding upon HUD M&M FSM Contracts during the period of time PE holds samesaid. This smacks of almost a criminal intent to disenfranchise Minority Females and Labor from ever bidding upon HUD M&M FSM Contracts. It is a personal affront to myself as the ONLY way PE would have ever had the opportunity to bid was under LPTA provisions. I spent years attempting to get LPTA into play and now PE wants to make sure that there are NO roads to equal and fair competition.
The aforesaid section is far more repugnant to the Constitution than simply a prima facie reading. PE is performing services upon pre-conveyance work which are, in many occasions, insured by the FHA. Many of those prime vendors utilize the very same Minority Females and Labor which would ordinarily be utilized by PE. To state that to work for PE one must become completely subservient to and owned by PE strikes at the very foundations of constitutional law including, but not limited to, the Uniform Commercial Code and the Sherman Act. PE’s intention is not missed in that they demand a monopolization of the work space, across state lines, using electronic means and in the furtherance of artifices and schemes.
A final note is the Waiver of Liens. In the State of Tennessee and other states, this is a criminal misdemeanor to even place this into a contract as early as 2005.
I am cautiously optimistic that HUD will address these discriminatory and unconstitutional provisions by its Prime Vendor. As I understand that Karnes will make the statement that Doctrine of Privity and Standing are not in play here, I argue the fact that, ab initio, had anyone signed this Contract, myself included, we would have waived all rights to even draft this email. In closing, I reserve my right to properly articulate a Complaint based upon HUD’s actions or lack thereof.